Some retractions beg for a kick of sand in the face, and others do the kicking. Here’s an example of what Charles Atlas might have written had he been a journal editor concerned with research integrity.

Here’s the notice for the paper, “Isolation and characterization of multipotent progenitor cells from the human fetal aorta wall,” which was cited five times before it was retracted, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge:

One of our readers contacted us to indicate that an article by Fang et al. (EBM 235:130-138, 2010), published in Experimental Biology and Medicine (EBM), contains a figure (Figure 3) that had previously been published in Biotechnology Letters (31:929–938, 2009, Figure 3).

Inspection of these figures by Steven Goodman, Editor-in-Chief of EBM, the handling EBM Associate Editor (Mark Magnuson), the Editor of Biotechnology Letters (Colin Ratledge) and the EBM Asian Editor (Huan Yao Lei) all concluded that the problem went beyond redundant publication as the labels in Figure 3 within the EBM and Biotechnology Letters publications had been changed on micrographs that are otherwise identical.

As this was potentially a case of research misconduct the EIC referred the case to the authors’ Institutions for their review. President Depei Liu, of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, wrote to Dr Goodman on June 3, 2011, after several months of internal investigation. The investigation determined that this is a case of scientific misconduct and recommended that EBM should retract the paper.

In the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, formulated by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) it is stated: ‘If substantial doubt arises about the honesty or integrity of work, either submitted or published, it is the editor’s responsibility to ensure that the question is appropriately pursued, usually by the authors’ sponsoring institution. Ordinarily, it is not the responsibility of the editor to conduct a full investigation or to make a determination – that responsibility lies with the institution where the work was done or with the funding agency. The editor should be promptly informed of the final decision, and if a fraudulent paper has been published, the journal must print a retraction.’

EBM conforms to the ICMJE Uniform Requirements and, therefore, at the request of the President of the Peking Union Medical College, we formally retract the article by Fang et al. (EBM 235:130-138, 2010).

We have sent correspondence to all authors, the Editor of Biotechnology Letters – where prior publication of the figure took place – the President of the Peking Union Medical College, and the President of Zengzhou University to tell them in advance of the action that was being taken by the journal.

Such an exhaustive notice could well have carried the subhead to readers: “It IS Your Damn Business, and We’re Going to Let You Know About It.” To which we say, well done!